Sortable directive, generic or specific?

[cmkramer]

The sortable directive is placed in the writer module though it seems it does not necessarily have to be writer specific. The directive itself has a very generic name, which can cause problems if its nature is only specifically aimed at facilitating the sortability of scenarios and steps in stories within the writer module.

It may be better to choose one of the following approaches:

1. Rename the directive to storyWriterSortable to show its only relevant for this specific case. Also do this for the controller.
2. Make it generic. This can probably be achieved by ensuring that the list-animate class statements are abstracted into a passable parameter for the directive as opposed to hardcoded class names that are very application specific. You would also have to double check the parent scope digest references to ensure that works in a generic setup, or if you should work with an explicitly passed sortable container on which you can call a digest.

For now option 1 might be the best, considering the lack of other cases where this directive is applied.

[Rescla]

Option 1 might be preferable since this is the only instance where the sortable functionality is used. If this changes in the future we can reconsider the animation fix and digest implementation based on that.

If this has to be generic I would prefer a $rootScope.$digest call over an explicitly provided digest. The list-animate is a bit of a hack to prevent animation glitches, this could be made configurable.